Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

© The Author(s) 2017. We continue the conversation initiated by Sally Thorne's observations about "metasynthetic madness." We note that the variety of labels used to describe qualitative syntheses often reflect authors' disciplines and geographical locations. The purpose of systematic literature searching is to redress authors' lack of citation of relevant earlier work and to reassure policy makers that qualitative syntheses are systematic and transparent. There is clearly a need to develop other methods of searching to supplement electronic searches. If searches produce large numbers of articles, sampling strategies may be needed to choose which articles to synthesize. The quality of any synthesis is dependent on the quality of the primary articles; both primary research and qualitative synthesis need to move beyond description and toward theory and explanation. Synthesizers need to pay attention to those articles which do not seem to fit their emerging analysis if they are to avoid stifling new ideas.

Original publication

DOI

10.1177/1049732317709010

Type

Journal article

Journal

Qualitative Health Research

Publication Date

01/07/2017

Volume

27

Pages

1370 - 1376